Regulation of Heraldry in England

Contents

The regulation of English heraldry between
1530 and 1688 has led many writers to project back into the Middle Ages
concepts and beliefs of later times. In particular, one often sees the
claim made that, in Medieval England, arms were restricted to the
knightly class, or at least to the gentry. Furthermore, by equating
gentry with nobility, some reach the conclusion that arms were restricted
to the nobility. One aim of this essay is to debunk these notions.

Prior to the 16th century, heraldry was unregulated in England, just
as it was unregulated in all European countries. No laws or institutions
prevented anyone from adopting arms as they pleased. Heraldry spread
from the noble and knightly class to the merchant, craftsmen and farming
classes from the 14th century on.

Starting in the early 16th c., Henry VIII decided to place
heraldry under the authority of his heralds, who were instructed
to draw up authoritative lists of acceptable arms then in existence
(arms which had been in use long enough, were used by members of
the gentry, and conformed to heraldic rules). They did so in the
course of visitations throughout the shires of England, visitations
which were repeated at intervals of 20-40 years. The later visitations
often confirmed arms which had been used for a few generations. In
parallel, the granting of new arms by the heralds became a common
practice. By the 17th c., the Law of Arms had evolved to the point
where only arms granted or confirmed in a visitation were considered
lawful, and the bearing of all other arms was unlawful and subject
to fines. This was undoubtedly the high point of heraldic regulation
in England. About that time (in 1672), a law was passed in Scotland
which gave a solid foundation to heraldic regulation there, down to
this day.

Many writers believe that English heraldry is just as regulated
nowadays as it was in the 17th century. In fact, this essay will argue,
the heraldic authorities have been essentially deprived of the means
of enforcement they had, by disuse and by changes in society, which
has demonstrated a large measure of indifference for the claims of
heralds to regulate all heraldry in England. The Glorious Revolution
of 1688 saw an immediate end to the visitations, and the Court of Chivalry,
which had been the heralds' means of enforcement, fell into disuse and
then oblivion. Its one-time resurrection in 1954 dealt with a case
of usurpation of a city's registered arms by a private corporation.
But, since 1797, no case of free assumption of arms has ever been
successfully prosecuted in England; not for lack of occasion, to be sure.

In the current state of affairs, in my opinion, the College exists
and continues to grant arms at a sizeable rate; but its coercive
authority has long disappeared, and it cannot prevent anyone from
assuming arms, as it once did. Those who seek grants from the
College do so of their own will.

The points of view expressed here somewhat unorthodox, although well
within the tradition of Oswald Barron at the turn of the century and
Leslie Pine closer to us. Most English textbooks on heraldry are
written by heralds of the College of Arms or people otherwise closely
associated with that institution. Their general tendency is to
describe the state of things they think ought to prevail, and their
own activities, without perhaps paying enough heed to actual practice.